Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

EM refactoring / EMv2 #193

Closed
wants to merge 85 commits into from
Closed

EM refactoring / EMv2 #193

wants to merge 85 commits into from

Conversation

mkuehbach
Copy link
Collaborator

@mkuehbach mkuehbach commented Dec 4, 2023

The PR contributing the new em that includes all consolidated readers for em, including EBSD, spectroscopy/EDS/EDXS, nionswift, and plain images

This is a breaking change as em_om, em_spctrscpy, em_nion are about to become obsolete with this PR.

This PR on purpose does not include changes on atom probe tomography as this will be a new separate PR,
appdefs and base classes merged in by the base_class_templates PR #51 from nexus_definitions did not change APM-related classes

markus.kuehbach added 30 commits August 15, 2023 16:34
…nd base class definitions from the base_class_templates nexus_definitions branch
…t file based on an existent input-file to which then the template data are appended. This functionality is useful in cases when a scientific software has already generated a NeXus file but just some additional pieces of information are missing for the injection into the RDM. Examples of such missing info could be users, samples, project information, etc. This proof-of-concept implementation copies that input file and subsequently opens it as the output file and appends the template data subsequently. The current implementation does not verify though the NeXus content of this inputfile. However, in the future, this could be useful. The question is when to verify this and how: right after the copy?, after the template data were written?, or via loading all input file content first into the template and verify it as usual prior to writing to disk? While the latter idea enables overwriting content from inputfiles, the disadvantage is that template data might become too costly (wrt to memory demands, irrespective whether on the client or server side).
…s from phase_names based on a table composed from an EM domain expert
…airmat is not for some reason completely bypassed, some silent assumptions in nexus and the verification code?
…ut the calibration of ipf and roi axis coordinates uses pixels currently but should use pixel times scan unit, next steps: i) implement this and tree-based downsampling, ii) linting, styling
…this completes the implementation of the tech partner HDF5 parsers for EBSD, next step linting and adding EDS reader (for IKZ, etc)
…and ran successfully on all datasets, 3/13 contained relevant content
…de implemented but ROI code does not populate template, implement IPF computation
…ass xmaps, and H5Web refactoring done and working, 3D IPF maps is the only thing remaining for the DREAM3D example to work on the set of 3D example data
…l a bug with the zeroth dimension of the results array, IPF color map key renders correctly though
…IRmat user/project meeting but preparing the removal of the crystal xmap also for the 2D cases
…o prepare with the resolving of possible merge conflicts
@mkuehbach mkuehbach changed the title Em refactoring EM refactoring / EMv2 Jan 17, 2024
@mkuehbach
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Before this PR can be merged, #204 has to be merged, ruff applied, checks done, and respective nexus_definitions PRs merged into fairmat so that the em_refactoring can then use the correct version of the nexus definitions.

…imgs, adf, and ceta imaging modes. NeXus files were generated successfully but weird h5web display error coming up within ipynb, removechild tested if spaces in filenames cause this but no, in hdfviewer file shows without any issues
…rom FHI C. Rohner's example is parsed successfully, next steps: i) add Velox metadata schema version, ii) add microscope metadata, iii) merge PRs
Copy link
Collaborator

@sanbrock sanbrock left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • Rebase is needed as nyaml2nxdl has already been taken away.
  • Restructuring is needed to move all debug/development code below the relevant reader subdir.
  • Also note that quite some shared code exists which shall not be duplicated in specific readers, but rather could be collected in a generic util subdir.
  • Note that different reader examples could be grouped and/or harmonised (and then documented) so users can chose which solution they want to follow.
  • Documentation according to the new doc style needs to be added.

@sherjeelshabih
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Rebase is needed as nyaml2nxdl has already been taken away.
  • Restructuring is needed to move all debug/development code below the relevant reader subdir.
  • Also note that quite some shared code exists which shall not be duplicated in specific readers, but rather could be collected in a generic util subdir.
  • Note that different reader examples could be grouped and/or harmonised (and then documented) so users can chose which solution they want to follow.
  • Documentation according to the new doc style needs to be added.

I would also like to add:

  • Test cases that atleast cover the conversion routine.

@sherjeelshabih
Copy link
Collaborator

@mkuehbach Area D is updating ASE to 3.22.1. Please have a look at this related PR as well: #263

Copy link
Collaborator

@sherjeelshabih sherjeelshabih left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've done a partial review till now. There are many repeating things. Can you please clear the pull request and keep only what's important? Maybe also apply the suggestions up till now to the rest of the parts and then I can have another look.

@mkuehbach
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closed as all development has been migrated to pynxtools-em, remaining suggestions from @sherjeelshabih have been resolved in that repo

@mkuehbach mkuehbach closed this Jun 3, 2024
@mkuehbach mkuehbach deleted the em_refactoring branch June 4, 2024 09:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants